Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Allahabad High Court Upholds Eviction of Akbar Nagar Slum Dwellers, Ensures Right to Clean Drinking Water Takes Precedence Over Unauthorised Occupation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Allahabad High Court, in a landmark decision, has upheld the eviction of slum dwellers from Akbar Nagar, balancing the rights of slum dwellers against the larger public interest of ensuring clean drinking water to the citizens of Lucknow. The bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Om Prakash Shukla observed, “the right to clean drinking water for the majority cannot be compromised by the unauthorized occupation of government land.” [Para 14]

The case arose from a conflict of fundamental rights: the right of slum dwellers to adequate housing versus the right to clean drinking water under Article 21 of the Constitution. Petitioners, residents of Akbar Nagar slums, challenged the eviction orders issued by the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) and sought rehabilitation under relevant state laws and policies. [Para 1, 4]

The slum dwellers of Akbar Nagar had occupied the banks of the Kukrail water channel, a critical source of drinking water for Lucknow. The LDA had issued eviction orders under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, which were contested by the slum dwellers on various legal grounds. [Para 4, 6]

The court recognized both rights as integral to the right to life under Article 21. However, it emphasized the need to prioritize the right to clean drinking water for a larger population over the unauthorized occupation by the slum dwellers. Referring to several Supreme Court judgments, the bench underscored the importance of both rights but favored the public interest in clean water. [Para 13-18]

Decision: The court directed the state to rehabilitate the BPL residents of Akbar Nagar under the ‘Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana’ with an initial deposit of Rs. 1,000, extending the scheme to all residents seeking relocation. It set a timeline for eviction and rehabilitation, ordering the vacating of the area by March 31, 2024. [Para 20-23]

In conclusion, the court upheld the eviction, emphasizing the fundamental right to clean drinking water while providing a humane approach to eviction through a comprehensive rehabilitation plan. [Para 24-26]

Date of Decision: March 6, 2024

Raju Sahu And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others

Latest Legal News